Within the current existing known prior art, there have been numerous attempts to provide efficient liquid control systems. However each include inherent disadvantages and drawbacks which the present invention addresses and overcomes in a manner heretofore not taught. For example, some references of the known prior art include the following U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,926,390, 4,875,781 and 5,094,543, each of which are entitled “PAINT MIXING CONTAINER”. Unfortunately each reference is only sufficient for mixing paint and cannot be easily used for proper storage once the container has been opened, nor do they allow for easy dispensing there from. Also each container uses a lid which inherently tends to accumulate paint thereon which is most inconvenient, very wasteful and not cost effective. Also, none of the references include and/or address disposal means which is environmentally friendly and/or acceptable.
It is to be understood that the present invention is usable with any type of liquid of user choice. However, the system as taught herein is especially useful in the auto paint industry, as will be seen within the following specification but it is not to be limited to such use. As the following is only exemplary of one possible scenario for use of the present invention.
In the automotive body repair industry, paint vendors provide auto body repair businesses, such as body shops and jobbers, with their paint formulas. Generally, these paint formulas are a composition (i.e., mixture) of paint components, such as colorants, tints, pearls, metalics, binders and/or balancers that once mixed, produce the desired color of paint to be applied to a repaired vehicle. The paint formulas of the paint vendors are formulated to match the colors that have been applied to vehicles by new car manufacturers over the years. In addition, these paint formulas include variants, to match the color fading of paint that can occur to a vehicle over years of service. Moreover, the palettes of paint formulas of the paint vendors also have custom colors (i.e., unconventional colors not typically used by vehicle manufacturers) that may be used to produce special finishes for custom or show cars. Hence, paint vendors provide body shops and jobbers with literally thousands of paint formulas for producing the vast spectrum of colors needed in the automotive body repair industry.
In the past, paint vendors would provide the body shops and jobbers with microfiche containing their paint formulas. Today the paint formulas are stored in computer memory. To determine the particular paint formula for a particular vehicle repair/paint job, a system operator, such as an employee of the body shop or jobber, first obtains the color code from the vehicle. This color code is typically part of the vehicle's identification number. In the case of an unconventional color, to be used to produce a custom paint finish, the code for a particular color is obtained from a catalog. This color code is then entered into the microprocessor of the computer, which accesses the computer memory, and displays, via a monitor, the paint vendor's paint formula which matches the identified vehicle color code.
The paint formulas are displayed according to the weight of the different paint components for mixing specific quantities of the paint formula, and the order in which the displayed paint components are to be mixed. Typically, paint formula mixing quantities are listed in quart, half gallon and gallon sizes, while the weight of the particular paint components needed to mix the desired quantity of paint, are listed in grams to a precision of a tenth of a gram. Generally, the paint components comprising tints, colorants, pearls and/or metallics are mixed first, while the paint components comprising binders and/or balancers are added last. Depending on the desired color, the paint formula can require just a few paint components, or over a dozen paint components, that must be mixed with a great degree of precision, to achieve a perfect color match.
Once the system operator determines that the correct desired paint formula is displayed on the computer monitor, the operator places a paint receptacle on a weigh cell that is linked to the microprocessor of the computer. Generally, a receptacle larger than the quantity of paint formula to be mixed is used to accommodate any excess paint inadvertently mixed by the operator. With the receptacle on the weigh cell, the weigh cell is zeroed by the operator, to make ready for the process of adding paint components to the receptacle to mix the desired color paint formula. Generally, the various paint components (of which there are dozens) are stored in containers kept within a rack. The rack has a mechanism that periodically stirs the paint components within the containers, so that the various paint components are ready to be dispensed as part of the paint formula mixing process. Typically, these containers are the original quart and gallon sized metal containers within which the paint components are shipped to the body shop or jobber. In metric system countries, these containers are the original one liter and four liter sized metal containers within which the paint components are shipped to the body shop or jobber. The original covers of these containers are replaced by specialized paint container lids which include stirring paddles that work with the stirring mechanism of the rack. These specialized paint container lids also have pour spouts that allow the paint components of the containers to be dispensed (i.e., poured out) into the receptacle atop the weigh cell. The pour spout of the specialized paint container lid is covered by a cover element that helps to protect the paint component within the container from contaminants. The cover element for the pour spout is movable between an opened state in which the paint component can be poured from its container through the pour spout by tipping (i.e., tilting) the container, and a closed state.
To reproduce the desired paint formula, the system operator begins by identifying the first listed paint component of the paint formula to be mixed. The operator then pours, by hand, the paint component into the weigh cell supported paint receptacle, until the weight of the paint component dispensed (i.e., poured) into the receptacle matches what is displayed on the computer monitor. The operator continues along on this course (i.e., hand pouring the paint components from their containers), until the correct weight of all paint components, needed to mix the desired color paint formula, have been added to the paint receptacle atop the weigh cell.
Although the above described system for mixing paint components (according to a paint formula), using the original containers of the liquid paint components and the above described specialized container lids, allows a skilled system operator to dispense the needed paint components to adequately recreate paint colors needed for repair/paint jobs, there are some disadvantages to this system. For example, there are at least two different types of paint component mixing racks for storing original containers of paint components. Each of these paint component mixing storage racks has a unique mixing system for stirring the liquid paint components within the original containers. As such, each of these unique mixing systems requires a unique lid member and associated stirring paddle device to allow the original container to be accommodated within the particular paint component mixing storage rack. Moreover, to mix a desired paint formula requires that the paint components be added to the paint receptacle, atop the weigh cell, with a great degree of accuracy. This accuracy, as stated earlier, is typically to a precision of 0.1 grams. For even a highly skilled operator this great degree of precision is difficult to obtain when hand pouring the paint components needed to mix the desired paint formula. It is especially difficult when many paint components must be poured into the paint receptacle in order to duplicate the paint formula.
The most common error on the part of the system operator of the body shop or jobber is over pouring which is due primarily to the manual “labor intensive” nature of the paint component dispensing process. Over pouring occurs when the weight of the paint component added to the receptacle atop the weigh cell, exceeds the weight of the component shown on the computer display for the desired paint formula. When this happens, the microprocessor of the computer recalculates the weights of the other paint components that need to be added to the receptacle to compensate for the over poured component. This recalculation is done automatically by the microprocessor since the weigh cell is linked to the computer. Based upon this recalculation, the system operator then needs to re-pour the other paint components to offset the over poured component of the paint formula.
While this re-pouring task may not be difficult when the paint formula only has a few paint components, the re-pouring task is particularly time consuming when there is a great number of components in the paint formula. Specifically, if an over pouring error is made in the last paint component of a series of ten components of a paint formula, then all of the previous nine components may have to be re-poured to compensate. This re-pouring task may be further complicated if another error is made during the re-pouring of the paint components, as this further error may require that some components be re-poured two or three times until the paint formula is finally accurately reproduced. Hence, over pouring errors can be costly to a body shop or jobber because of the additional “man hours” needed to mix the paint formula.
Not only are over pouring errors expensive because of the additional man hours needed to reproduce the paint formula, over pouring errors are also costly in the amount of additional paint formula that is mixed because of the errors. Automotive paint can cost in excess of $100.00 per quart. An over pouring error of just one pint may translate into an additional cost of $50.00 or more that a body shop or jobber may have to absorb, unless this additional paint cost can be justified to an automobile collision insurance carrier. Moreover, this additional paint, if not used in the repair/paint job, becomes a hazardous waste that must be disposed of properly, thereby adding still more costs that are attributable to paint component over pouring errors and the like.
To further clarify the novel features of the present invention, we herewith provide the following explanation that addresses the current methods available, the pros and cons, and the advantages of the present invention when compared to the known prior art.